Thanks Tom
On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 7:22 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I wrote:
> Yup, sure looks like a bug to me, especially since it seems to work as
> expected before 9.5. No idea offhand what broke it.
The answer is, I broke it, through some ill-advised neatnik-ism :-(,
ie clearing a field I thought would be unused but it wasn't.
Fix pushed. Thanks for the report!
regards, tom lane
